MONOLOGUE WRITTEN BY CLYDE LEWIS

When I approached the topic of evolution, I was hoping that I was making it clear that we live in times that there are too many variants in the environment to say that the earlier model presented by Darwin for its day was considered the perfect explanation in science for where we began and how certain species die off.

It was highly controversial of me to say that what Darwin has said and how his words have been interpreted do not fit in today’s model of evolutionary theory.

When our core beliefs are attacked, it’s often easy for humans to retreat to statements such as this: “My belief is a fact, and yours is wrong.” That’s exactly why we cannot trust mere human understanding to explain the unobservable past—emotion and pride get in the way. Today we are dealing with narratives and framework built on assumptions about the past assumptions that will never have direct, first-hand, and observational proof.

I don’t want to rehash the creationist versus evolutionist argument — it has already been done and some will not understand the truth until it is right upon them.

It has long been assumed that the force driving evolution is natural selection, not the creation of genetic variants because the rate of mutation was thought to be constant and unaffected by circumstances although Darwin himself did not believe this.

I introduced the controversial idea that the model of selection must include adaptive mutation.

Adaptive mutation is defined as a process that, during the nonlethal selection process, produces mutations that relieve the selective pressure whether or not other, non-selected mutations are also produced.

Examples of adaptive mutation or related phenomena have been reported in bacteria and yeast but not yet outside of microorganisms. A decade of research on adaptive mutation has revealed mechanisms that may increase mutation rates under adverse conditions.

Directed mutagenesis, also known as directed mutation, was a hypothesis proposing that organisms can respond to environmental stresses by orthogenetically directing mutations to certain genes or areas of the genome.

We have seen over time how the environment is affecting the genome.

In genetic epidemiology, gene-environment interactions are useful for understanding some diseases. Sometimes, sensitivity to environmental risk factors for a disease are inherited rather than the disease itself being inherited. Individuals with different genotypes are affected differently by exposure to the same environmental factors, and thus gene–environment interactions can result in different disease phenotypes.

For example, sunlight exposure has a stronger influence on skin cancer risk in fair-skinned humans than in individuals with darker skin.

These interactions are of particular interest to genetic epidemiologists for predicting disease rates and methods of prevention with respect to public health. The term is also used amongst developmental psychobiologists to better understand individual and evolutionary development.

We learn that serious studies are underway to understand how the genetic code is adapting to an ever-changing environment. The adaptation process is not perfect and the body’s responses to drastic environmental changes are creating mutations that develop into terminal illnesses.

For example, there is no single cause of cancer. Cancer development depends on things such as family history (genetics), health, nutrition, personal habits, and the environment. Genetic factors by themselves probably account for only a small fraction of cancers. Genetic factors do have an important influence on a person’s chance of developing cancer when combined with outside factors. These factors are either voluntary (such as cigarette smoking, diet, and sexual behavior) or involuntary (such as breathing polluted air or drinking contaminated water).

There is yet another source that is proving to be responsible for directed mutagenesis and that is the effects of electromagnetic fields on the body.

Cancer was first associated with exposure to electromagnetic fields in 1979 when Wertheimer and Leeper reported that children dying from cancer resided more often in homes believed to be exposed to higher EMF than did healthy control children.

Hypotheses generating and case-control studies have revealed the existence of excess risk of leukemia among electrical workers.

In 2011, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified electromagnetic fields as “possibly carcinogenic to humans, based on an increased risk for glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer, associated with wireless phone use”

While they didn’t classify it as a “known carcinogen,” it’s important to remember that such classification often takes decades—or longer.

Research showed a correlation between asbestos inhalation and cancer a century ago, yet it wasn’t classified as a carcinogen until 1980. Additionally, while its production was banned in the U.S., it continues to be imported.

There is also the new controversy over glyphosate, the carcinogenic ingredient in the weed killer, Roundup. Monsanto had reported that scientists signed off on a study that claimed the glyphosate was safe.

A California jury has awarded a couple more than $2 billion in a verdict against Monsanto. This is the third recent court decision involving claims that the company’s Roundup weed killer causes cancer.

Roundup is still being sold. at Home Depot, Target, Walmart and Amazon. There is no word on whether or not it will be pulled off the market.

Most big U.S. retailers who sell the product are either staying mum on the issue or following regulations regarding its sale.

According to Bayer, the company that now owns Monsanto, no pesticide regulatory authority in the world currently considers glyphosate to be a cancer risk to humans at the levels at which humans are currently exposed.

It is obvious that companies like Bayer are more interested in pushing carcinogenic products on the market even though the products are causing mutagenic harm to those who use it.

The same applies to studies that show that the electromagnetic smog caused by wireless networks are creating directed mutations that cause cancer.

The level of exposure to electrosmog that is harmful remains highly debated. However, numerous studies have provided us with sufficient data to support the conclusion that electrosmog is harmful. Additionally, many of these studies suggest that currently established limits for exposure are insufficient. Research has shown a direct correlation between exposure to electromagnetic radiation and cancer.

A leading activist on the issue of electromagnetic radiation and its negative impacts on public health has described the rollout of 5G as a “massive health experiment” which could “become a global catastrophe.”

Arthur Robert Firstenberg is a well-known advocate for curtailing the development of 5G networks both in the US and internationally, claiming that superfast broadband could cause cancer in humans and wildlife, as well as exacerbating the symptoms of electromagnetic hypersensitivity.

In a bid to stall the rollout of the networks Firstenberg is petitioning the World Health Organization, the UN and the EU to “urgently halt the development of 5G.”

Firstenberg also claims that, in areas of the world where the rollout of 5G antennas have already begun, the local population, including insects and other wildlife, are already getting sick. He claims to have a condition known as electromagnetic hypersensitivity, which induces symptoms like dizziness, nausea, amnesia, insomnia, tremors, heart arrhythmia, acute and chronic pain, among others though it is not scientifically or medically recognized.

The USA is currently leading the way on 5G. In June of 2016 press the Federal Communications Commission’s head, Tom Wheeler, announced the opening up of low, mid and high spectrums. There was no mention of health effects whatsoever. But the dangers are real.

5G has encountered strong pushback from the general public since it was first announced. In September 2018, Mill Valley city council, in California, voted to block the development of 5G towers and small cells in residential areas citing “serious adverse health and environmental impacts caused by the microwave radiation emitted from these 4G and 5G Small Cell Towers.

Does 5G create mutagenic effects on insects, animals, and humans?

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), “There is no scientific evidence that provides a definite answer to that question… More research is needed before we know if using cell phones causes health effects.”

Despite a number of broad-ranging studies into the potential effects of cell phone radiation showing no solid evidence of any significant health risks to humans (let alone insects), many within the scientific community remain skeptical that the benefits of 5G technology outweigh the potential harm to humans.

Two recent studies also showed an elevated risk of cancerous tumors developing in male rats (though not female) who were exposed to electromagnetic fields (EMFs) for nine hours a day over two years. However, the claims didn’t stand up in follow-up double-blind tests.

215 scientists from 40 different countries have allegedly signed an appeal calling for international protection from non-ionizing electromagnetic field exposure, the effects of which include, but are not limited to, “increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being.”

In a letter, Dr Martin Pall, a biochemistry professor at the Washington State University, claimed there were severe biological and health effects, including increased risk of cancer via DNA mutations, due to exposure to 5G networks, while also claiming that the FCC is a “captured agency” that is subject to the will of the very industry it is supposed to regulate.

5G would provide broadband speeds over 100 times faster than current data speeds. But to facilitate its rollout 300,000 new antennas would be required in the US alone. That’s roughly equal to three decades-worth of cell phone tower development.

The networks require a more dense array of “small cell” sites because their high-frequency waves provide faster speeds but don’t travel as far.

5G technologies are far less studied for human or environmental effects. It is argued that the addition of this added high-frequency 5G radiation to an already complex mix of lower frequencies, will contribute to a negative public health outcome both from both physical and mental health perspectives.

Radiofrequency radiation (RF) is increasingly being recognized as a new form of environmental pollution. Like other common toxic exposures, the effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation (RF EMR) will be problematic if not impossible to sort out epidemiologically as there no longer remains an unexposed control group. This is especially important considering these effects are likely magnified by synergistic toxic exposures and other common health risk behaviors.

Effects can also be non-linear. Because this is the first generation to have cradle-to-grave lifespan exposure to this level of man-made microwave (RF EMR) radio frequencies, it will be years or decades before the true health consequences are known.

Electromagnetic effects will also change the weather something that has been overlooked by Climate change activists. It will also affect weather forecasts because it can affect weather satellite observation.

Weather engineering is key to all other electromagnetic military operations. Not only is high-frequency “sky beam” technology daily adjusting the temperature-dependent conductivity of the lower atmosphere by heating portions of the ionosphere, but it has been weaponized for the military doctrine of full spectrum dominance.

Along with conductive metal nanoparticles, trillions of nano-sensors and microprocessors have been and continue to be released into the stratosphere and troposphere via jets, drones, ships, and rockets.

In short, our atmosphere is no longer conducting natural charge, current, and voltage. Instead, we are now breathing from a ramped-up amplifier/condenser/ antenna built of conductive nano-metals and ionized electrons.

Tiny and almost weightless for maximum long-lasting loft, metal nanoparticles offer multiplied surface area and attract moisture for generating storms. Besides attaching to and ionizing molecules of oxygen, those in the upper atmosphere bond with and draw unknown organisms down into our atmosphere, creating chemical synergies our immune systems know nothing about. Yet we are forced to breathe this chemical soup while the nanoparticles (including “smart dust” and “dusty plasma”) breach our blood-brain barrier.

Thus it is no longer only the unseen world of wireless radio waves and microwaves pulsing through our bodies and brains that we must take into account but nano-synergies that our Earth and immune systems are so far ill-equipped to handle.

The new wavelengths from the introduction of 5G will certainly affect the skin. In fact, it will be the perfect conductor for these low wave bands.

The human body has between two million to four million sweat ducts. Dr. Ben-Ishai of Hebrew University, Israel explains that our sweat ducts act like “an array of helical antennas when exposed to these wavelengths,” meaning that we become more conductive. A recent New York study which experimented with 60GHz waves stated that “the analyses of penetration depth show that more than 90% of the transmitted power is absorbed in the epidermis and dermis layer.

For some people, this will create skin cancers and there will be some people that will feel pain all over their skin.

A 1994 study found that low-level millimeter microwave radiation produced lens opacity in rats, which is linked to the production of cataracts. An experiment conducted by the Medical Research Institute of Kanazawa Medical University found that 60GHz “millimeter-wave antennas can cause thermal injuries of varying types of levels. The thermal effects induced by millimeter waves can apparently penetrate below the surface of the eye.”

A 1992 Russian study found that frequencies in the range 53-78GHz (that which 5G proposes to use) impacted the heart rate variability (an indicator of stress) in rats. Another Russian study on frogs whose skin was exposed to these frequencies found heart rate changes.

There are also studies that indicate that in countries where 5G has been tested – birds are abandoning their nests as well as suffering health issues like “plumage deterioration, locomotion problems, reduced survivorship, and death.

Bird species that are affected by these low levels, non-ionizing microwave radiation are the House Sparrows, Rock Doves, White Storks, Collared Doves, and Magpies, among others. But it’s not just the birds. The declining bee population is also said to be linked to this non-ionizing EMF radiation. It reduces the egg-laying abilities of the queen leading to a decline in colony strength.

Thousands of studies link low-level wireless radio frequency radiation exposures to a long list of adverse biological effects, including:

DNA single and double strand breaks

oxidative damage

disruption of cell metabolism

increased blood-brain barrier permeability

melatonin reduction

disruption to brain glucose metabolism

generation of stress proteins

Meanwhile, leaders from around the world take the harmful effects much more seriously such as “Switzerland, Italy, France, Austria, Luxembourg, Bulgaria, Poland, Hungary, Israel, Russia and China have set RF exposure limits 100 to 10,000 times less than the USA. They recognize that there can be non-thermal biological effects from wireless radiation.” Ultimately, these nations are assuming The Precautionary Principle that states “if an action or policy has a suspected risk of causing harm to the public, or to the environment, in the absence of scientific consensus (that the action or policy is not harmful), the burden of proof that it is not harmful falls on those taking that action.”

For well over 50 years, scientists and industry insiders have known that these microwave pulse-modulated radio frequency radiation, day-in-and-day-out, is very toxic; particularly to pregnant women and children, and yet our leaders allow the telecom industry to continue its expansion, completely unbridled; eviscerating the very protections that prevented the industry from steamrolling us in the first place.

They have known how electromagnetic frequencies influence directed mutation and mutagenesis.

Most Americans have no idea what is about to be forced upon our biosphere. Most Americans do not know how this will affect their DNA and how we could see mutations of various kinds happening just because we can make the internet faster and capable of running a Smart City.

Under the current 5G plan, every square inch of America will be bathed and covered in penetrating and irradiating microwaves like never before.

If genetic variation apparently occurs in response to the environment, rather than independently of it we should be able to see the changes that happen to the human body and the genome.

If the body does not adapt, it will perish.

Survival of the fittest.

https://soundcloud.com/groundzeromedia/mutagen-mutant-weapons-for-quiet-wars-w-elana-freeland-may-14-2019

Written by Ron Patton